Nate Silver is just $10 away from predicting that Obama has an 82.7% chance of winning!

Perhaps the most laughable aspect of this election season is the way the DUmmies have embraced the PRECISE prognostications of one Nate Silver. Silver's shtick isn't to merely announce poll results that are artificially weighted in favor of Democrats. Any run of the mill leftwing pollster, such as PPP, can do that. Silver takes it to the next level in which he dramatically announced to the exact decimal point the chances that Obama has of winning. As of Halloween, Silver has declared that Obama has exactly a 77.4% chance of winning. Not 77.3% or 77.5% chance but precisely 77.4%. Such precision must be completely scientific...or so the DUmmies believe which is why they continue to cling to their Nate Silver security blanket so fervently to block out any contrary polling data such as from Gallup or Rasmussen (which they embraced until they didn't like his results). If you check out DUmmieland you will see thread after thread in which the DUmmies continue to cite Nate Silver's precise prognostications as if it were Holy Writ. However, let us take a look at this recent Nate Silver Security Blanket THREAD, "Nate Silver has Obama up." A psychological benefit for the DUmmies is that even if Obama loses they can cry vote fraud because Nate Silver declared he had a 77.4% chance of winning. So let us now watch the DUmmies cling to their Nate Silver security blanket in Bolshevik Red while the commentary of your humble correspondent, wondering if Bob Menendez requesting FEMA(le) aid, has changed that calculation to 77.3%, is in the [barackets]:

Nate Silver has Obama up

[And Dominican chicks also had Bob Menendez up.]

299 EV 77.4% Chance of winning

[There is a 77.4% chance of DUmmies already popping open their Freudenschade victory champagne bottles. And now on to the other DUmmies clinging fervently to their Nate Silver security blankets...]

Wow. Getting almost back to September levels!

[When the Bamster had a 77.5% chance of a Freudenschade victory.]

Great! Now I can relax.

[Yup! No need to even bother to vote because Obama has banked it...according to Nate Silver.]

Need constant assurance because it is difficult to hear all the spin throughout the day and wonder if Romney will win with all his lies.

[No need to worry, my little DUmmie. According to Nate Silver, you have only a 22.6% chance of melting down into an angry psychopathic vegetable.]

You never let your opponent see one sliver of daylight.

[That's what I call seeing the Silver lining.]

Good stuff. Sure hope it comes to be true.

[Bev Harrris is just $10 away from guaranteeing it.]

Just watched him tell Charlie Rose tonight that Obama is the winner based on his data.

[Keep telling the Democrats that victory is in the bag because that will be sure to lower the lazy RAT vote. Hey, I waited a long time to early vote yesterday but if I were a Democrat who listened to Nate Silver, I would have probably skipped the ordeal because he has declared it to be in the bag. Therefore I predict that there is a 77.4% chance that Nate Silver's prognostications will LOWER the Democrat turnout.]

Man I wish this thing was over.

[You are only 5 days away from no longer worshiping Nate Silver's zipper.]

[And I predict there that there is a 77.4% chance that in five days the DUmmies will be back to throw-up!]

The Quinnipiac poll should push him to 80% then!

[Actually 79.9% according to the infallible Nate Silver.]

Obama will probably drop to the mid-70s soon, thanks to a conveniently timed Rasmussen or Gravis poll.

[77.3% to be precise.]

Nate put the SurveyUSA (+3) OHIO poll for Obama into the model, but the new Quinnipiac poll to come out this morning is not in Nate's model yet. Obama is already at 78% in OHIO tonight, so maybe he will hit 80% in Nate's model tomorrow when he includes the new Quinnipiac poll.

[80.3% when you factor in the 7-11 coffee cup poll.]

Obama will break 80% tomorrow due to the Quinnipiac poll, I bet Things are looking better and better!

[There is a 77.4% chance that Obama will break 80% tomorrow. The mighty infallible Oz has spoken! Now lean back, DUmmies. Close your eyes and click your heels together three times and repeat after me..."There is a 77.4% chance that Obama will be re-elected."]

I early voted yesterday and was HAPPY to see I had to WAIT about a half hour to vote. Many Democrats will look at the long lines and then give up trying. Hey, after all, Nate Silver predicted there is a 77.4% chance that Obama will win so why bother?

p.s. I early voted EARLY in the morning and the same polling place took well over an hour that afternoon. I know because that is when my wife went.

You can not post anything regarding a poll on any of the newsite message boards without a hoard of libs immediately screaming “Nate Silver” this and “Nate Silver” that. They seem to believe that Nate Silver has a direct line to the almighty which makes his prediction infallible. They’ve put all their eggs in the Nate Silver basket to such a degree that if Obama loses next Tuesday Silver better be hiring a body guard because there is going to be a lot of angry liberals looking to tar and feather him.

I have always liked Mr. Silver’s analysis. I think he is wrong this time around, but I also think he loves numbers far more than politics. Selling his baseball statistic formulas for a tidy sum shows me he at least has the capability to understand and use statistics and probability. He described himself as “Libertarian that finds he more often sides with Dems”. Not sure how that happens, but his politics aside he doesn’t fudge his numbers once the season starts. Right or wrong results (probably wrong this time around as he has nothing in his formula to check the effects of weather during voting days. Something very real that always helps republicans) I respect his work. His transparency with his process makes me believe he is trying to be honest with the numbers. Whoever wins Silver won’t be celebrating he will be looking over the results to figure out which polls get beter weighting for next time and how his formula can be better.

18
posted on 11/01/2012 8:17:05 AM PDT
by HenryArmitage
(it was not meant that we should voyage far.)

The DUmmies have less tolerance for concern trolls than even FR. Not likely either they will have much tolerance for election day/day after schadenfreude trolls either, but it may be worth a try. Although one could theoretically be a schadenfreude troll by constantly wailing about the schadenfreuede going on at FR, and saying things like “it sucks to be us” etc.

22
posted on 11/01/2012 8:30:58 AM PDT
by HerrBlucher
(Praise to the Lord the Almighty the King of Creation)

The most interesting thing reading this is that DU crowd is looking at the same exact data we are and have a completely different take on it. They are equal but opposite of FR. So the truth lies in the middle which isn’t such a happy place.

Silver is betting his bias along with the Lib pollsters he swallows that borders on delusional like the rest of the clowns at DU.

For an example. Poll after poll including PPP and PMSNBC polls show very large margins of Indies breaking for Romney. I think the average is about 15% over Obama of all polls taken into account. What did Obama win the Independents vote by in 2008? I recall he won it by 7% to 8% over McCain and about the difference in the presidential 2008 election. If the polls are shown to be correct in a few days, that is about a 22% to 23% Indy swing from 2008 and in favor of Romney.

The liberal pollsters and Silver “think” that the Dims will show up voting at the same rate or even more than 2008, and that the Rs won’t increase their numbers but even be less than in 2008 to include the Independents who are woefully under represented in his analysis. The DUmmies are getting taken for a balloon ride where Silver is the balloon pilot. That balloon is filled will hydrogen gas - soon to be a flaming Hindenburg.

Silver is betting his bias along with the Lib pollsters he swallows that borders on delusional like the rest of the clowns at DU. For an example. Poll after poll including PPP and PMSNBC polls show very large margins.. I agree for the most part. The idea is using the past to predict the future. If the PPP and PMSNBC are way off on their results they will suffer a less predictive weighting next year. As you pointed out the trouble with using historical turnout/results is each year has its own unique turnout/results and it is near impossible to factor in such intangible things as storms, economy etc. etc.. There is an excellant article at RedState that discusses just those short comings. Here if you are interested (should pop)

29
posted on 11/01/2012 10:03:51 AM PDT
by HenryArmitage
(it was not meant that we should voyage far.)

I had NOT seen that. Very interesting indeed! Although I tend not to give a damn about national numbers as we are in an EV battle. Now being ahead in swing states early voting, that would be telling, I would think. From what i have seen from swing states, early voting looks tight but way down for Dems from 2008 numbers. Have you been seeing the same thing?

31
posted on 11/01/2012 10:24:54 AM PDT
by HenryArmitage
(it was not meant that we should voyage far.)

I really hope we are not setting ourselves up for a big time disappointment...

While getting cocky about an outcome that you want so badly is a sure sign that you will lose (Supreme Court Obamacare decision, Casey Anthony Trial), don't fall for anything that the Libs pull out of their butts. The freaks at DU would celebrate the "Psychic Friends Network" predictions of a 77.4% chance for O if it meant they could escape reality for a little while.

Early voter turnout doesn't belong to Libs no matter what the talking heads say.

37
posted on 11/02/2012 3:38:22 AM PDT
by submarinerswife
(Insanity is doing the same thing over and over, while expecting different results~Einstein)

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.